Steve Marshall is a Principal in the Washington, DC, office of Fish & Richardson. His practice focuses on complex patent litigation and counseling with an emphasis on embedded systems and software, artificial intelligence, and robotics. Mr. Marshall also has extensive experience in communications and networking protocols and standards. He has litigated patent cases across a variety of industries and technologies, including semiconductors, telecommunications, computer networking, optical data storage, electro-optical/infrared countermeasures systems and fire suppression systems. Mr. Marshall has represented clients before U.S. District Courts around the country, in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and in Section 337 proceedings before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC).
Mr. Marshall’s patent litigation experience covers all major aspects of litigation. He is experienced in pre-filing investigations, case management, all phases of fact and expert discovery, including taking and defending depositions, motion practice, claim construction, including arguing terms during Markman proceedings, summary judgment, trial, and appeal. He has been an active member of trial and appellate teams, and has led proceedings before several government agencies.
Mr. Marshall was previously a Summer Associate with the firm (2005). His technical experience includes work as an Integration Engineer in EMC Corporation’s eLab (2000-2003), SAP Basis Administrator with The Gillette Company (1999), and Analyst in the SAP Solution Center at Andersen Consulting, LLP (1998-1999).
Certain Robotic Vacuum Cleaning Devices and Components Thereof Such As Spare Parts; Inv. No. 337-TA-1057 (ITC) – Lead attorney representing Complainant iRobot in an investigation relating to robotic vacuum cleaners, autonomous behavior, and embedded systems processing. Succeeded in obtaining limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders on behalf of iRobot.
01 Communique Laboratory, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc. (N.D. Ohio) – Represented defendant Citrix in a case relating to remote computer access technology. Obtained jury verdict of non-infringement.
Parallel Networks Licensing, LLC v. Microsoft Corp. (D. Del.) – Represented defendant Microsoft in a case relating to load balanced processing of dynamic Web page requests. Obtained jury verdict of non-infringement.
Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Samsung Electronics America et al. (E.D. Tex.) — Represented Samsung in a case relating to multimedia signal processing techniques for the control of video displays and the coordination of video content. Obtained favorable settlement.
Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication Devices, Computers, Tablet Computers, Digital Media Players, and Cameras; Inv. 337-TA-952 (ITC) – Represented respondent Apple in an investigation relating in part to selective operation of a device in either a conventional or IP telephony mode.
PaymentOne Corp. v. PayPal, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) – Represented defendant PayPal in a case relating to mobile payments processing. Obtained favorable claim construction ruling and judgment of non-infringement.
Certain Electronic Devices, Including Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Tablet Computers, Media Players, and Televisions, and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-862 (ITC) – Represented Samsung respondents in an investigation relating to, amongst other things, speech coding and decoding algorithms and digital signal processing.
Parallel Networks, LLC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., et al. (E.D. Tex.); Parallel Networks, LLC v. Amazon.com Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.) – Represented numerous defendants, including Amazon and Google, in a case relating to the dynamic generation of applets. Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement which was affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
ClassCo Inc. v. Kyocera Int’l, Inc., et al. (D. Mass.) – Represented plaintiff ClassCo in a case relating to audible caller identification. Obtained highly favorable settlement.
Virginia E-Commerce Solutions, LLC v. eBay Inc. et al. (E.D. Va.) – Represented defendants eBay and PayPal in a case relating to online credit card payment processing. Obtained favorable settlement.
Software Rights Archive LLC v. Google Inc. et al. (E.D. Tex.) – Represented defendants Google and AOL in a case relating to the indexing, searching, and display of data. Obtained transfer of venue from the Eastern District of Texas.